Skip to comments.Rich Hispanic Exec Wants to Eradicate The Term ‘Illegal Immigrant’
Posted on 07/05/2012 3:36:49 PM PDT by Justaham
A wealthy Hispanic executive who makes a fortune dealing with the Hispanic market is on the march to eradicate the term illegal immigrant. Charles Patrick Garcia, writing on the CNN website, lauds the U.S. Supreme Court for eschewing the use of illegal immigrant and instead utilizing the term removable alien.
The court's nonjudgmental language established a humanistic approach to our current restructuring of immigration policy.
When you label someone an "illegal alien" or "illegal immigrant" or just plain "illegal," you are effectively saying the individual, as opposed to the actions the person has taken, is unlawful. The terms imply the very existence of an unauthorized migrant in America is criminal. In this country, there is still a presumption of innocence that requires a jury to convict someone of a crime. If you don't pay your taxes, are you an illegal? What if you get a speeding ticket? A murder conviction? No. You're still not an illegal. Even alleged terrorists and child molesters aren't labeled illegals.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
why is it these idiot fools from the failed sewer of mexico lecture a successful country on what we should do?
why do people in this country care what these fools want?
when mexico advances to indoor plumbing - and stops pissing in the water they drink - maybe i’ll listen - until then - stfu
I only *wish* they were removable.
Exactly. Why is it so hard for this otherwise intelligent man to understand that.
“How about wetbacks!”
I refer to them as “Gobacks” as in Go Back to where you slithered in from.
Nonsense, illegal is an adjective in those terms and clearly defines the actions of the person. The person is an illegal alien because he's not a legal resident or citizen of the US. That does not say the person is an illegal person, only his presence in the US is illegal.
The same with illegal immigrant. The person's act of migrating into the US was illegal, which does not make anyone an illegal person.
And saying someone is an illegal, in a discussion of illegal aliens, is merely using a shortened term in a correct context.
This is all a lot of whiny nonsense, which doesn't mean it won't get lots of attention in the MSM as if it's some great, noble cause.
How about ‘enemy invaders’?
Me too! Deport every last one of them and seal the border.... no more need for the term.
Apparently we should call them “Macho Men”.
It’s what’s expected after people like Bush made American citizenship all but pointless.
America is an immigration dumping ground.
In English the subject is "illegal alien", not "illegal immigrant" ~ since everybody knows you have to have an immigration visa to be an immigrant. If you don't have one and you don't have any kind of other visa, then you are simply an "illegal entrant" or "illegal alien", and both phrases are treated as nouns ~ reading "noun phrase" and "non clause" is in order.
The man's arguments in English are total nonsense. In Spanish they might make more sense simply due to the need to make subject and adjective agree with common suffixes.
English is far more flexible than Spanish. Time this illegal alien learns that!
I prefer to call them alien invaders. Immigrants would have crossed our border and entered into U. S. territory openly AND legally.
Deport them all and build the fence, then we’ll never mention them again.
I always thought "wetback" worked just fine...
Let's also eradicate the terms or "murder" and "rape".
I guess the NEW belief is that if you pretend it doesn't exist that it will just fade away while everyone is watching "dancing with the stars".
He must be Geraldo’s best friend!
Nope it is a correct adjective to describe what kind of immigrant is being discussed.
It’s just trying to control the language. So we must never stop using the term.